Who is the better devotee?

[anadi 0]

First we should know the definition of bhakti, and then we should use this definition as a barometer to easily decide the different bhakta's various stages. Bhakti has been defined in the Kapila-Devahuti samvada (discussion) in the Third Canto of Srimad Bhagavatam, wherein Kapiladeva instructed his mother. There he states:

mad-guna-sruti-matrena

mayi sarva-guhasaye

mano-gatir avicchinna

yatha gangambhaso 'mbudhau

 

laksanam bhakti-yogasya

nirgunasya hy udahrtam

ahaituky avyavahita

ya bhaktih purusottame

 

["The manifestation of unadulterated devotional service

is exhibited when one's mind is

at once attracted

to hearing the transcendental name and qualities of the Supreme Personality of Godhead,

who is residing in everyone's heart.

Just as the water of the Ganges flows naturally down towards the ocean,

such devotional ecstasy,

uninterrupted by any material condition, flows towards the Supreme Lord." (S.B. 3.29.12)]

 

In Srimad Bhagavatam there are no "skin" and no "seeds".

There is only rasa (nectar) from top to bottom, in every part.

 

Spoken by SBVedanta Narayana Maharaja

(to be continued)

 

[anadi 0]

Kapiladeva was the son of Kardama Rsi, who was himself a manifestation of Krsna like Rsabhadeva - a saktyavesa avatara. Kardama Rsi retired from worldly life, giving up all material possessions and considerations and thinking all material relations to be false. He went to the forest to perform worship of his Lord. He had no need to leave his home, but he did so to teach others by his example. In his laukika-lila, human-like pastimes, he acted as a father, just as Krsna, the Supreme Personality of Godhead, acted as a son with His father.

In Vrndavana Krsna worshiped Radha Kunda,

whereas in Dvaraka He worshiped Sankara to get the boon of a son,

and there is no harm in that.

Similarly, although he was a saktavesa avatara, Kardama Rsi left home to take the renounced order and live in the forest. Before doing so, however, he told Kapiladeva to help his mother.

 

Srimati Devahuti inquired from Kapiladeva about the aim and object of all souls. Kapiladeva replied to his mother that the goal of life is to attain pure bhakti, and his instructions are contained in several chapters in the Srimad Bhagavatam. He taught that there should not be a prominence of grhastha-dharma, wherein householders are always entangled in the protection, nourishment, and support of their families.

One day the family person will have to give up that family, if not by his own will, then forcibly.

It is imperative, therefore,

that one engage in bhakti

as defined above by Lord Kapiladeva.

 

There is another definition of bhakti given earlier in Srimad Bhagavatam:

 

sa vai pumsam paro dharmo

yato bhaktir adhoksaje

ahaituky apratihata

yayatma suprasidati

 

["The supreme occupation (dharma) for all humanity is that by which men can attain to loving transcendental devotional service unto the Lord.

Such devotional service must be

unmotivated and uninterrupted

and will completely satisfy the self."

(Srimad Bhagavatam 5.7.11)]

 

 

[LimitlessLight 0]

As you are already the self you seek, the very seeking is the ignorance if at once you give up your seeking and rest in conciousness you will at once be aware of your trancendental nature.

[anadi 0]

Srila Bhaktivedanta Narayana Maharaja spoke further

 

Srila Rupa Gosvamipada has included these previous definitions of bhakti in his own, most complete definition:

 

anyabhilasita sunyam jnana karma avartam

 

anukulyena krsnanu silanam uttama bhakti

 

[(word-for-word synonyms) anya-abhilasita-sunyam - without desires other than those for the service of Lord Krsna, or without material desires (such as those for meat-eating, illicit sex, gambling and addiction to intoxicants); jnana - by the knowledge of the philosophy of the monist mayavadis; karma - by fruitive activities; adi - by artificially practicing detachment, by the mechanical practice of yoga, by studying the Sankhya philosophy, and so on; anavrtam - not covered; anukulyena - favorable; krsna-anusilanam - cultivation of service in relationship to Krsna; bhakti uttama - first-class devotional service.]

 

"Uttama bhakti, pure devotional service, is the cultivation of activities which are meant exclusively for the pleasure of Sri Krsna, or in other words the uninterrupted flow of service to Sri Krsna, performed through all endeavors of the body, mind, and speech, and through the expression of various spiritual sentiments (bhavas). It is not covered by jnana (knowledge aimed at impersonal liberation) and karma (reward seeking activity), and it is devoid of all desires other than the aspiration to bring happiness to Sri Krsna." (Sri Bhakti-rasamrta-sindhu 1.1.11)

 

Externally it seems that the words anukulyena (favorable) and anusilanam (endeavors to please Krsna) have the same meaning, but they do not. A tree may be anukula for Krsna, but it is not anusilanam. It does not consciously engage in any activity for Krsna, nor does it have any relationship with Him. The tree's bhakti is therefore not uttama, nor is it even bhakti. This of course does not apply to the trees in Vraja. They are all transcendental and they do perform uttama-bhakti. It is for this reason that the word anusilanam (continual engagement in activities performed under the guidance of the disciplic succession for the exclusive purpose of benefiting Krsna and making Him happy) has been used by Srila Rupa Gosvami. Both words are needed and included in his complete definition.

 

If this definition is applied to Dhruva Maharaja, it is seen that he has some defect. His defect was his anyabilasita (desires other then to make Krsna happy), and moreover he had no anukulyena krsna anusilanam. He was a sakama-bhakta (devotee with material desires) and in some ways he was like a karmi. There are two kinds of bhakti - pradhani-bhuta and guni-bhuta. Guni-bhuta bhakti is also called karma-misra-bhakti or jnana-misra-bhakti. When karma and jnana are serving the prominence of bhakti, that bhakti will be pradhani-bhuta, and therefore Dhruva Maharaja's bhakti was guni-bhuta. He desired fruitive gain (a kingdom greater than that of his father, and that of his grand-father, Brahma), and thus his activities could not touch Srila Rupa Gosvami's definition. Vaisnavas do not want to be like Dhruva Maharaja, but they can learn something from his example of determined practice.

 

 

[anadi 0]

Now let us discuss Devahuti. Kapiladeva taught her many truths about bhakti, but in the end she attained only nirvana-prapti. Who was her aradhadeva? Whom did she worship? It was not Krsna, Rama, or Narsimhadeva. She worshipped brahma. You must read Srimad Bhagavatam thoroughly; otherwise you will not understand these truths.

 

Devahuti was taught the meaning of bhakti. The fruit of bhakti is not brahma-nirvana, but Devahuti had no special aradhadeva (worshipable deity), like Narsimha, Vamana, Kalki, Rama, or Balarama. She simply attained brahma-nirvana; that is, she saw brahma, who is in all living entities. Brahma is nirakara (formless), nirguna (without qualities), and niranjana, and therefore her attainment does not fit the definition of uttama-bhakti. A real bhakta will refuse to accept any kind of nirvana from Krsna. There are many kinds of nirvana, but pure devotees will reject them all. Some lessons are to be taken from Kapiladeva's teachings to Devahuti, but none of those lessons is brahma-nirvana.

 

 

[anadi 0]

What kind of bhakta was Bharata Rsi? What was his stage of his bhakti? In his future life, as Jada Bharata, when King Rahugana sarcastically rebuked him, chastised him, and threatened to punish him, he replied as follows:

 

["The great brahmana Jada Bharata said: My dear King and hero, whatever you have spoken sarcastically is certainly true. Actually these are not simply words of chastisement, for the body is the carrier. The load carried by the body does not belong to me, for I am the spirit soul. There is no contradiction in your statements because I am different from the body. I am not the carrier of the palanquin; the body is the carrier. Certainly, as you have hinted, I have not labored carrying the palanquin, for I am detached from the body. You have said that I am not stout and strong, and these words are befitting a person who does not know the distinction between the body and the soul. The body may be fat or thin, but no learned man would say such things of the spirit soul. As far as the spirit soul is concerned, I am neither fat nor skinny; therefore you are correct when you say that I am not very stout. Also, if the object of this journey and the path leading there were mine, there would be many troubles for me, but because they relate not to me but to my body, there is no trouble at all." (Srimad Bhagavatam 5.10.9]

 

["My dear King, you have unnecessarily accused me of being dead though alive. In this regard, I can only say that this is the case everywhere because everything material has its beginning and end. As far as your thinking that you are the king and master and are thus trying to order me, this is also incorrect because these positions are temporary. Today you are a king and I am your servant, but tomorrow the position may be changed, and you may be my servant and I your master. These are temporary circumstances created by providence." (Srimad Bhagavatam 5.10.11)]

 

[My dear King, if you still think that you are the King and that I am your servant, you should order me, and I should follow your order. I can then say that this differentiation is temporary, and it expands only from usage or convention. I do not see any other cause. In that case, who is the master, and who is the servant? Everyone is being forced by the laws of material nature; therefore no one is master, and no one is servant. Nonetheless, if you think that you are the master and that I am the servant, I shall accept this. Please order me. What can I do for you?" (Srimad Bhagavatam 5.10.12)]

 

["In a previous birth I was known as Maharaja Bharata. I attained perfection by becoming completely detached from material activities through direct experience, and through indirect experience I received understanding from the Vedas. I was fully engaged in the service of the Lord, but due to my misfortune, I became very affectionate to a small deer, so much so that I neglected my spiritual duties. Due to my deep affection for the deer, in my next life I had to accept the body of a deer." (5.12.14)]

 

In his previous life Bharata Maharaja was not a siddha-bhakta; he was a sadhaka and he had reached the stage of bhava. However, although he was not a prema-bhakta, his was a bhava-bhakta. There only was one loophole in his bhakti, and that is that it was not uninterrupted (the prefix "anu" in the word anusilinam means uninterrupted) He never lost his bhakti. Bhakti can only be lost if we commit aparadha, offenses, and Bharata Maharaja did not do that.

 

 

[anadi 0]

It has been written in the Srimad-Bhagavatam that if karmis follow their varnasrama dharma, their duties to their family and society, they will achieve no gain at all. Rather, they will have to go to hell. What, then, is the harm if anyone leaves his varnasrama-dharma, accepts the path of chanting and remembering the Supreme Lord, and then leaves that path in an immature stage?

 

tyaktva sva-dharmam caranambujam harer

 

bhajann apakvo 'tha patet tato yadi

 

yatra kva vabhadram abhud amusya kim

 

ko vartha apto 'bhajatam sva-dharmatah

 

 

 

["One who has forsaken his material occupations to engage in the devotional service of the Lord may sometimes fall down while in an immature stage, yet there is no danger of his being unsuccessful. On the other hand, a non-devotee, though fully engaged in occupational duties, does not gain anything." (Srimad Bhagavatam 1.5.17)]

 

If the practitioner dies before perfecting his bhakti, or if any obstacles come and he stops his practice for some time, there is no great harm unless he is committing offenses. Bharata Maharaja did not commit any aparadha, and therefore his bhakti did not reduce. It seems as though he lost his bhakti, but this was not the case. His bhakti simply became stagnant or checked for some time.

 

Why was his bhakti interrupted? Srila Visvanatha Cakravarti Thakura has explained that this was simply a lesson for others. In his next life, when he took birth as a deer, his bhakti was still at the stage of rati, bhava, and he realized his mistake. Then, in his third birth he always engaged in the service of the Lord and he attained prema-bhakti.

 

Anukulyena krsna anusilanam. Anu means without interruption - like the uninterrupted flow of honey from a jar. Bharata Maharaja's bhakti was checked because he gave his heart to a deer. This was not an aparadha; rather it was an obstacle. His bhakti stopped for some time because he did something wrong.

 

Actually, it was the wish of Krsna that we should learn something from Bharata Maharaja. He himself did not actually fall down. When the stage of ruci manifests in ones heart he has no opportunity to commit any aparadha, what to speak of one who has rati. He was only teaching us that we ourselves should be careful. In his next birth he became a deer, he remembered his mistake, and he repented; in his third birth he became a pure brahmana. At that time he began from rati, where he had previously left off, and then attained Vaikuntha-prema.

 

Still, his bhakti was not uttama-bhakti in the strict sense of the term. He was worshiping Narayana, not Krsna. In the verse definition of uttama-bhakti, Srila Rupa Gosvami uses the words Krsna anu-silanam. Uttama-bhakti especially means to worship Krsna Himself. Bhakti is pure uttama-bhakti if it is performed in relation to Brajendra-nandana Krsna. It does not actually refer even to Dvarakadhisa-Krsna or Vasudeva-Krsna.

 

In this third birth Bharata Maharaja became a pure bhakta. His bhakti was mixed with some jnana (knowledge of the Lord's opulence), and this is understood by what he taught to King Rahugana. He stressed the importance of tattva-jnana, not nirvisesa-jnana. However, until a devotee crosses the level of aisvarya-jnana and forgets that Krsna is the Supreme Lord, uttama-bhakti cannot manifest in reality

 

[anadi 0]

There are many gradations of bhakti and bhaktas,

as explained by Srila Sanatana Gosvami in his Brhat Bhagavatamrta.

The first category is the sakama-bhakta (the devotee who, like Dhruva Maharaja, has material desires),

then the jnani-bhakta (the devotee who, like Prahlada Maharaja, has full awareness of God's powers and opulence),

then the suddha (pure) bhakta (the devotee who, like Ambarisa Maharaja, serves Krsna Himself),

the premi-bhakta (the devotee who, like Hanuman, is always serving),

the premapara-bhakta (the devotee, like the Pandavas, who is related to Krsna and has some knowledge of His opulence), and finally

the prematura-bhakta (the devotee who, like Uddhava, is most intimate,

having many relationships with Krsna, and who has some knowledge of His opulence).

 

<font color="blue"> The gopis are beyond any of these categories</font color> , for Krsna Himself became the gopis. Krsna divided Himself in two – a right side and a left side. From His own left side He became Radhika, and therefore Radhika is no one other than Krsna Himself. All the gopis are manifestations of Radhika, and that means they are also manifestations of Krsna.

 

Soken by SBV Narayana Maharaja

[Enlightened 0]

To reach to a state of such an understanding that is : "rest in your own consciousness , for you are infinite in your own true self." is a marvelous thing, but is it that simple? I sincerely ask you this question, if nothing other than the self exists and all we are doing is seeking the self, then why aren't we perfect in ourselves. Why do we live our life at all? why is there a difference between a lazy person and a person who has accomplished so much in his/her life? if you say there is no difference, then why do we even carry out any type of action. If i am you and you are me then why do i feel such a notion of individuality. If the individuality is unreal, then there is no difference between vivekananda and a lazy man on the street. If that is so, then why do anything? please answer my question (s).

 

sincerely,

sudhamshu (sudszy)

[anadi 0]

It is stated in Sri Brahma-samhita (text 37):

 

ananda-cinmaya-rasa-pratibhavitabhis

tabhir ya eva nija-rupataya kalabih

goloka eva nivasaty akhilatma-bhuto

govindam adi-purusam tam aham bhajami

 

["I worship Govinda, the primeval Lord,

residing in His own realm, Goloka,

with Radha, resembling His own spiritual figure,

the embodiment of the ecstatic potency

possessed of the sixty-four artistic activities,

in the company of Her confidantes (sakhis),

embodiments of the extensions of Her bodily form,

permeated and vitalized by His ever-blissful spiritual rasa."]

 

 

[anadi 0]

Dhruva Maharaja was a sakama-bhakta, a devotee whose motive for service is the fulfillment of his material desires. Dhruva performed austerities for the sole purpose of attaining a kingdom. Therefore, when Lord Narayana appeared to him, there was no need to ask for the fulfillment of his desire. Without waiting for Dhruva to ask for his desired boon, Lord Narayana told him, "I am now giving you the kingdom of the whole universe to rule for 36,000 years." After speaking thus He disappeared, and Dhruva began to weep. He cried out, "What a mistake I have made! I was searching for a broken piece of glass and I was fortunate to attain a cintamani stone instead; but now I have lost it."

 

What is the essence of this history? Although Dhruva Maharaja was initiated by a bona fide guru like Sri Narada Rsi, at the time of his initiation he had so many desires to rule the world. Then, after initiation, he performed very severe austerities, up to the point of not even breathing air. By the will of Lord Narayana he automatically received the position he wanted, for his father came to him and told him, "Everything is yours." Dhruva Maharaja then sat on the throne and began to rule the world. During his reign, his guru Narada and other highly elevated Vaisnavas used to visit his palace, and he served them continually. He served Hari, guru, and Vaisnavas, sometimes when they were visiting him and otherwise in their absence. The visiting Vaisnavas would instruct him in bhakti, and gradually he became elevated. His desire to have a throne totally disappeared.

 

 

A karmi has worldly desires, but if he simply worships the Supreme Lord Krsna or His manifestations like Rama, Narasimha, Kalki, and Narayana, all his desires will eventually disappear and pure bhakti will manifest in his heart. Similarly, by the association of Sri Narada Rsi and other rsis, Dhruva Maharaja's desires disappeared and pure bhakti appeared.

 

Still, something remained – a slight contamination (kasaya), and this was likened to Narada Rsi in his previous life. Because of this kasaya, Dhruva Maharaja wanted to see his mother as he was boarding the Vaikuntha airplane, and that is why he could not attain Vaikuntha. That is why he entered instead Dhruvaloka, located near Rama-priya Vaikuntha planet within this universe. He could not attain any direct service to Narayana there, but because he was a disciple of Narada Muni, it may be that after some time he achieved the Vaikuntha planets beyond the universe.

 

spoken by Srila Bhakivedanta Narayana Maharaja

[Guest guest]

It is nice abhout Dhruva Maharaja. If one person now like Dhruva Maharaja ALL WORLD be devotee. All world! It is write SP.

[anadi 0]

Narottama dasa Thakura sings in his "Thakura Vaisnava-.":

 

thakura vaisnava-., avanira su-sampada, suna bhai hana eka mana

asraya laiya bhaje, tare Krsna nahi tyaja, ara saba mare akarana

 

["The lotus feet of the saintly Vaisnavas are the greatest wealth in this world.

O my dear brothers!

Please listen attentively.

Krsna never forsakes one who takes shelter of the Vaisnavas and worships Him.

Others live and die without reason."]

 

The pure guru,

the high-class siksa or diksa-guru,

is asraya-bhagavan.

Those conditioned souls who try to take shelter of Krsna directly may be rejected by Him,

but regarding those conditioned souls

who take firm shelter of a bona fide siksa-guru, diksa-guru, or any Vaisnava,

Krsna will think, "He wants poison,

but how I can give it to him?

I must give him the nectar of bhakti."

Under this circumstance, Krsna gives bhakti in the end.

In the middle

the person has to taste the results of his desire,

but after this he can become eligible to attain pure bhakti.

This is the essence of this history of Dhruva Maharaja.

 

 

[anadi 0]

[Question:]

You said in class,

and you have quoted from scripture,

that Radha is also Krsna and that

She has the same qualities as Krsna.

Krsna is the origin of all.

Should it be understood that

Radha is also the origin of all?

How can that be, though?

Isn't Krsna Her origin?

 

[srila Narayana Maharaja:]

We can give the analogy of a tree and its fruits.

All the fruits come from the tree,

so it can be said that fruit is also the tree.

However, though the fruits have come from the tree,

the fruits are sweet,

whereas the tree is not.

[At this point Srila Maharaja smiled broadly and said,

"Is that answer okay?"

as the assembled devotees happily and loudly applauded]

 

The understanding is that

of course Krsna is madhur,

and His sweetness (madhura)

is concentrated in Radhika.